Cyber Resilience

CWE · MITRE source

CWE-759Use of a One-Way Hash without a Salt

Abstraction: Variant · CVEs in our corpus: 16

The product uses a one-way cryptographic hash against an input that should not be reversible, such as a password, but the product does not also use a salt as part of the input.

This makes it easier for attackers to pre-compute the hash value using dictionary attack techniques such as rainbow tables. It should be noted that, despite common perceptions, the use of a good salt with a hash does not sufficiently increase the effort for an attacker who is targeting an individual password, or who has a large amount of computing resources available, such as with cloud-based services or specialized, inexpensive hardware. Offline password cracking can still be effective if the hash function is not expensive to compute; many cryptographic functions are designed to be efficient and can be vulnerable to attacks using massive computing resources, even if the hash is cryptographically strong. The use of a salt only slightly increases the computing requirements for an attacker compared to other strategies such as adaptive hash functions. See CWE-916 for more details.

Last updated: 04 July 2026 08:17 UTC

Cumulative inbound coverage

How completely the frameworks we cross-walk collectively cover this — the verdict is the strongest single mapping (overlapping partials are not summed); breadth shows the corroboration behind it.

Collective: full · 4 mapping(s) from 2 framework(s): ATT&CK 3 (mostly) · OWASP-Web 1 (full)

See the full cumulative-coverage rollup →

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

This weakness contributes to A04:2025 Cryptographic Failures.

NIST 800-53 r5 controls that address this weakness (1)AI

Control Title Family Why it addresses this CWE
AT-5Contacts with Security Groups and AssociationsATSecurity associations provide guidance on proper one-way hash usage including salting, reducing the chance of unsalted implementations.

MITRE ATT&CK techniques this weakness enables

Our own two-way CWE↔ATT&CK cross-walk — a direct mapping with no public source (the CWE→CAPEC→ATT&CK chain leaves most top weaknesses, incl. XSS and SQLi, mapped to nothing). Drafted by Grok and spot-checked by Claude Opus 4.8.

Direction: other covers this; this covers other (F/M/P = full / mostly / partial).

Top CVEs of this weakness type, ranked by Risk Priority

CVE Risk CVSS EPSS Published
CVE-2026-45787 UPD7.09.10.00102026-05-28
CVE-2020-162445.57.20.00652020-09-23
CVE-2025-102055.58.80.00202025-09-17
CVE-2025-342085.57.50.00412025-10-02
CVE-2021-212533.55.80.00742021-01-21
CVE-2020-251643.56.50.00602022-04-14
CVE-2023-14303.56.50.00802023-06-09
CVE-2024-364403.56.80.00292024-08-22
CVE-2024-84533.54.90.00302024-09-30
CVE-2023-338383.54.40.00232025-01-29
CVE-2025-274083.54.80.00152025-02-28
CVE-2025-538843.55.30.00162025-09-17
CVE-2025-362533.55.90.00202026-02-02
CVE-2026-45027 UPD3.55.90.00142026-05-27
CVE-2026-9370 UPD1.53.70.00202026-05-24